A Flash Developer Resource Site

Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 70

Thread: Offshore energy

  1. #1
    Senior Member cancerinform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    press the picture...
    Posts
    13,449

    Offshore energy

    The US is creating a mess with off-shore drilling.

    In contrast Germany is creating clean CO2-free Energy with Offshore Windparks:

    http://www.spiegel.de/fotostrecke/fo...cke-54273.html

    What a difference!
    - The right of the People to create Flash movies shall not be infringed. -

  2. #2
    Total Universe Mod jAQUAN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Honolulu
    Posts
    2,429
    it's because you can put em together with an alan wrench.

  3. #3
    pablo cruisin' hanratty21's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    on the lam
    Posts
    2,275
    You can't drive a car with wind energy.

    psst - they're putting a wind farm off of the shore of the Massachusetts coast...
    psst - T Boone Pickens wants to put wind farms all throughout the center corridor of the US...

    Cancer - many of your posts seems to have the same Anti-American/Pro-Euro tone to them. There is nothing wrong with that from an opinion standpoint, but you should probably have a clue what you're talking about before spouting off your endless non sequiturs.
    Last edited by hanratty21; 04-27-2010 at 12:35 PM.
    "Why does it hurt when I pee?" -- F. Zappa |

  4. #4
    Flashkit historian Frets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    flashkit
    Posts
    8,797
    HR if it's electric you can

    When I was a kid this was the coolest ride in the desert


    Also the US is involved with offshore wind projexts
    http://www.windenergypartners.biz/gow.html

  5. #5
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    I hate to be the Magellan here. But, the evidence suggests that CO2 is not causing substantial global warming.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkz...eature=channel
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  6. #6
    Spartan Mop Warrior Loyal Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Pit of Despair
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    I hate to be the Magellan here. But, the evidence suggests that CO2 is not causing substantial global warming.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkz...eature=channel
    If Carter is right then the scientific community will eventually reverse standing and form a concensus behind his opinion.
    Until then, his theories are at odds with his peers.

    Either way, are you arguing that reducing pollution is a bad thing?

    Also, the increase in co2 is causing a pH change in our oceans which is rapidly killing our coral reefs and destroying the lowest level of our food chain.
    Do you think that is something we should try and change?

    The acidification of our oceans is directly linked to co2 just as the indoor aquaculture and saltwater tanks I keep have a pH swing in relation to the co2 level where the tanks are kept.
    Even the most fledgling reefkeepers know that the co2 level in the gas exchange that occurs at the surface of your tank water will greatly affect the pH level of your tank causing massive bleaching and rapid tissue loss of any coral frags and colonies you have.
    ::
    "Just go make web and stfu already." - jAQUAN

    "Twitter is a public display of verbal diarrhea that comes out in small squirts." - Gerbick

  7. #7
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    If Carter is right then the scientific community will eventually reverse standing and form a concensus behind his opinion.
    Until then, his theories are at odds with his peers.
    That is only true if we assume that the scientific community is infallible and not prone to political manipulation. Unfortunately, as we have learned from climategate and elsewhere, that isn't the case.

    Here is an article from a climate scientist that explains why and how legitimate science is suppressed:

    Maybe for the same reason we believed, 30 years ago, that global cooling was the biggest threat: a matter of faith. "It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species," wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.
    http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/...ming020507.htm

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Also, the increase in co2 is causing a pH change in our oceans which is rapidly killing our coral reefs and destroying the lowest level of our food chain.
    Do you think that is something we should try and change?
    I would need to research that aspect further to make a conclusion. Based on what I know from researching CO2 and global warming, it doesn't sound like there should be much concern about human produced CO2 for this reason either. The amount of CO2 produced by humans is a small fraction of the CO2 that is naturally produced, mostly by decay. The natural variations of CO2 levels are far greater than any measured change in human produced CO2.

    So, the theory that changes in CO2 produced by humans is the main cause of pH changes in the ocean does not seem to be very plausible. It would make little sense, for instance, to squander trillions of dollars (that could be put to practical use like feeding the starving) to reduce CO2 by less than 1%, if the natural changes in our climate are going to create a change so much larger that our efforts will have no substantial effect.

    [Also, CO2 levels have been higher than they are now and the "lowest level of our food chain" (along with the polar bears) were not destroyed. In fact, they evolved successfully over more time in conditions we are moving toward, rather than away from.]
    Last edited by FlashLackey; 04-27-2010 at 07:32 PM.
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  8. #8
    Spartan Mop Warrior Loyal Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Pit of Despair
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    That is only true if we assume that the scientific community is infallible and not prone to political manipulation. Unfortunately, as we have learned from climategate and elsewhere, that isn't the case.
    And of course, by your own reasoning, you are only correct if Carter is in also infallible and completely immune to political manipulation and the billions of dollars that multi-national corporate polluters have to throw at "scientists" to support their business models and profits by any and every dishonest means possible.

    We only have to look at the major discrepancies between results in research based on funding by non-profit organizations versus for-profit corporations throughout history to see the motive for distorting results in the favor of the funder to see how flawed that can be.

    E.G. drug research showing major health dangers when a drug is tested by an independent laboratory as opposed to the same research showing no danger when the same research is conducted by "company-owned scientists".
    Same as has been shown by every piece of research conducted in the last 50yrs by independent scientists versus "oil-company owned scientists".
    ::
    "Just go make web and stfu already." - jAQUAN

    "Twitter is a public display of verbal diarrhea that comes out in small squirts." - Gerbick

  9. #9
    Spartan Mop Warrior Loyal Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Pit of Despair
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    ...and the "lowest level of our food chain" (along with the polar bears) were not destroyed.
    You obviously haven't even bothered to do basic fact-checking.
    Coral reefs around the world are showing staggerring and catastrophic decline.
    Staghorn (the major form of coral reef structure) coral off the coast of Florida has shown a 95% decline in my lifetime alone.

    Thanks for the "polar bear" political red herring which has nothing to do with coral reef decline or acidification of the oceans.
    It just cements the fact that you don't care what the facts are and want to play politics at the expense of the planet.
    Congrats.
    ::
    "Just go make web and stfu already." - jAQUAN

    "Twitter is a public display of verbal diarrhea that comes out in small squirts." - Gerbick

  10. #10
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    And of course, by your own reasoning, you are only correct if Carter is in also infallible and completely immune to political manipulation and the billions of dollars that multi-national corporate polluters have to throw at "scientists" to support their business models and profits by any and every dishonest means possible.
    The difference is that I base my reasoning not on who Carter may or may not be but on what he is able to demonstrate.

    The scientific method does not work via popularity. If one person is able to demonstrate that the evidence contradicts a theory, that theory has failed. It doesn't matter who the person is, who funds them, etc.

    When Magellan traveled around the globe, he demonstrated that a once-popular theory was false. Who paid for his ship is irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    You obviously haven't even bothered to do basic fact-checking.
    Coral reefs around the world are showing staggerring and catastrophic decline.
    Staghorn (the major form of coral reef structure) coral off the coast of Florida has shown a 95% decline in my lifetime alone.
    Where did I say that coral reefs were not in decline?

    The question is regarding what is causing it and whether or not there is anything humans can realistically do to change it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Thanks for the "polar bear" political red herring which has nothing to do with coral reef decline or acidification of the oceans.
    It just cements the fact that you don't care what the facts are and want to play politics at the expense of the planet.
    Congrats.
    No. The danger to polar bears based on global warming is an example of fear mongering used to promote an agenda. As pointed out, the CO2 levels have been higher and the climate warmer than it is now during the time of polar bear existence and they obviously survived. It's quite possible that the same is true about coral reefs and the issue is being used for the same dubious purpose.
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  11. #11
    Spartan Mop Warrior Loyal Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Pit of Despair
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    Where did I say that coral reefs were not in decline?
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    It's quite possible that the same is true about coral reefs
    Both in the same post. Congrats.

    Obviously you are rashly responding based on political beliefs and not any research or facts or else you would not make comments that were so blatantly ignorant and uninformed.
    Don't you have the least honest intellectual curiousity to check the facts before you make such judgements or misleading statements?

    Please look into coral reef decline and restoration projects first before you answer so hastily again.
    If possible, join a local dive group/forum or even better, a coral reef aquarium/aquaculture forum and speak with people that have firsthand knowledge before you make any judgements and/or posts.
    Even the noobs with the most limited knowledge in the field have a better understanding than to make such comments as yours.
    ::
    "Just go make web and stfu already." - jAQUAN

    "Twitter is a public display of verbal diarrhea that comes out in small squirts." - Gerbick

  12. #12
    Spartan Mop Warrior Loyal Rogue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    The Pit of Despair
    Posts
    513
    Quote Originally Posted by FlashLackey View Post
    The difference is that I base my reasoning not on who Carter may or may not be but on what he is able to demonstrate.
    Obviously you don't because you don't give any weight to what the opposition to your political beliefs has already demonstrated 100x over.
    You dismiss 99.999% of the evidence and research in favor of the 0.001% that supports your political ideology.
    By your actions, you are not interested in facts of any sort, merely affirmations of your own political beliefs.
    ::
    "Just go make web and stfu already." - jAQUAN

    "Twitter is a public display of verbal diarrhea that comes out in small squirts." - Gerbick

  13. #13
    supervillain gerbick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    undecided.
    Posts
    18,986
    I'm waiting on Megatron and energon cubes...

    [ Hello ] | [ gerbick ] | [ Ω ]

  14. #14
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Both in the same post. Congrats.
    lol. There is a difference between making a claim and observing a possibility.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Obviously you are rashly responding based on political beliefs and not any research or facts or else you would not make comments that were so blatantly ignorant and uninformed.
    Don't you have the least honest intellectual curiousity to check the facts before you make such judgements or misleading statements?
    That's why I said that I needed to do more research before making a conclusion about that aspect. I described my impression that your theory isn't very plausible based on facts that I already know.

    Your apparent theory:
    Human created CO2 is the cause for the changes in ocean acidity that is unhealthy for coral reefs.

    My observation about that theory:
    Human created CO2 is a very small percentage of the CO2 in the atmosphere. CO2 levels fluctuate naturally, much more than the total amount that humans create. So, it appears possible that, even if we brought human CO2 levels to zero, they would still increase naturally and cause the reefs to decline.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Please look into coral reef decline and restoration projects first before you answer so hastily again.
    Please re-read my comments. I think you will find that there is nothing hasty or assuming about them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    If possible, join a local dive group/forum or even better, a coral reef aquarium/aquaculture forum and speak with people that have firsthand knowledge before you make any judgements and/or posts.
    Even the noobs with the most limited knowledge in the field have a better understanding than to make such comments as yours.
    I think that your thrashing about over an observation is an excellent example of what the second article I posted discussed. You seem so overwhelmed by the orthodoxy of your belief that you aren't willing to even address the most basic observations about the issue in a rational manner. Too dangerous to "The Truth".

    If it's not true that CO2 levels fluctuate a lot and damage reefs naturally, you and your diving buddies should be eager and able to clarify and support your position, if for nothing else than to protect the coral reefs. It's only if you can't support a position but want to anyway that you would need to resort to the hyperbole and ad hominem attacks you've engaged in here.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loyal Rogue View Post
    Obviously you don't because you don't give any weight to what the opposition to your political beliefs has already demonstrated 100x over.
    You dismiss 99.999% of the evidence and research in favor of the 0.001% that supports your political ideology.
    By your actions, you are not interested in facts of any sort, merely affirmations of your own political beliefs.
    Not true. I'm the same as Carter: global warming agnostic. I've been following this subject for a long time and have tried to find the best explanations and arguments on both sides. I've been familiar with what Carter points out for a long time through other studies. He just explains it well.

    To my knowledge, there simply isn't an equivalent explanation supporting CO2 caused global warming that is as well founded in available data. If you know of a study or lecture on the subject of global warming that is as substantiated as Carter's, please do post it and I'll give it the same consideration.
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  15. #15
    Senior Member cancerinform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    press the picture...
    Posts
    13,449
    Quote Originally Posted by hanratty21 View Post
    Cancer - many of your posts seems to have the same Anti-American/Pro-Euro tone to them. There is nothing wrong with that from an opinion standpoint, but you should probably have a clue what you're talking about before spouting off your endless non sequiturs.
    1. Where is many?

    2. If there is something I think is not ok, yes I bring it up. Besides that I am native German, so I think there is nothing wrong that I might be Pro-EU even I live in the US. However, living here for over 20 years I also know a bit about things Europe could learn from the US.

    3. I just started that thread and here you are people give comments including there are Windparks in the US, which I learnt from you. Why I first have to do research on this? That is not the point of such a thread. Besides you mentioned about the Windparks. I don't think that little bit of oil they get from offshore drilling is worth of what happened now. This is just to satisfy those Americans who would like to see independence from foreign oil, which is an illusion. I don't think Obama, whose politics I largely agree with (He must also be Anti-American/Pro-Euro!) did the right decision in this matter to behave bipartisan.


    PS: It looks like LRs and FLs conversation from the other day continues but on a different topic.
    Last edited by cancerinform; 04-28-2010 at 03:19 AM.
    - The right of the People to create Flash movies shall not be infringed. -

  16. #16
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by cancerinform View Post
    This is just to satisfy those Americans who would like to see independence from foreign oil, which is an illusion.
    From 1954 through 2007 federal offshore tracts have produced 16.8 billion barrels of oil and 173 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of natural gas.
    In 2007, federal offshore tracts produced 27% of the oil and 14% of the natural gas in the United States. In terms of 2007 proved remaining reserves, three of the top ten oil fields in the United States were offshore fields in the Gulf of Mexico (Mars-Ursa, Thunder Horse, and Atlantis)[1] The 492 million barrels of federal offshore oil produced in 2007 was down from the record 602 million barrels produced in 2002. The 2.86 TCF of offshore gas produced in 2007 was down from the high of 5.25 TCF produced in 1996.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offshor..._United_States

    It seems that off-shore drilling is productive. So, doesn't that mean that people are correct to say that more off-shore drilling would make the US less dependent on foreign oil?
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  17. #17
    Senior Member cancerinform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    press the picture...
    Posts
    13,449
    ...but not independent!

    In the end changing to alternative energies and getting mostly away from oil will make the US and other countries independent from the middle east. That, however, will have enormous consequences on the oil producing countries, a problem one should better start thinking about now.
    - The right of the People to create Flash movies shall not be infringed. -

  18. #18
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    We wouldn't have to be 100% independent from foreign oil in order to benefit from less dependence.
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

  19. #19
    Senior Member cancerinform's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    press the picture...
    Posts
    13,449
    To that I have to agree. However, as the accident and others show, the price can be very high.
    - The right of the People to create Flash movies shall not be infringed. -

  20. #20
    Hood Rich FlashLackey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    148
    There are definitely risks. But, there are also high costs for either dependence on foreign oil or switching to alternative energies.
    "We don't estimate speeches." - CBO Director Doug Elmendorf

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Click Here to Expand Forum to Full Width

HTML5 Development Center